Our City Online

Messageboard - Politics

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Election Results - November 2, 2010

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Politics Election Results – November 2, 2010

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 200 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #411096

    SamuraiJack
    Participant

    Hamsterdam wrote >>
    It’s remarkable that Franklin Co. Clarence Mingo won in such a blue county.
    His office is outstanding, he ran a heck of a campaign and is a guy to watch in the future.

    He was the lone Republican I voted for. He’s done some really good things in streamlining his office and processes.

    #411097

    Paul
    Participant

    Tenzo wrote >>

    kit444 wrote >>

    Paul wrote >>
    Am I the only person on here who is happy to see that Kasich won and relieved that we will not have endure the ridiculous boondoggle of a train that takes almost 3 hours to get from Columbus to Cincinnati?

    Congrats. You won. Now if we ever want to have rail service we’ll have to move to somewhere like Vancouver.

    Or any other large to medium sized city in the US

    If anyone wants to see what a viable mass transit system (light rail to get downtown from the suburbs/airport, dedicated bike lanes, electric bus system, etc.) looks like I would be glad to show them around Vancouver. I will tell you our mass transit system in no way resembles the absurd embarrassment that was the proposed 3C rail.

    So yes, congratulations to me and congratulations to the people of the great state of Ohio. Please let’s get some good mass transit options in Cbus/Ohio in the near future! A train that takes nearly 3 hours to get from Columbus to Cincinnati via Dayton is not one of them! It was a joke. And I, for one, was not laughing.

    #411098

    kit444
    Participant

    Paul wrote >>

    Tenzo wrote >>

    kit444 wrote >>

    Paul wrote >>
    Am I the only person on here who is happy to see that Kasich won and relieved that we will not have endure the ridiculous boondoggle of a train that takes almost 3 hours to get from Columbus to Cincinnati?

    Congrats. You won. Now if we ever want to have rail service we’ll have to move to somewhere like Vancouver.

    Or any other large to medium sized city in the US

    If anyone wants to see what a viable mass transit system (light rail to get downtown from the suburbs/airport, dedicated bike lanes, electric bus system, etc.) looks like I would be glad to show them around Vancouver. I will tell you our mass transit system in no way resembles the absurd embarrassment that was the proposed 3C rail.
    So yes, congratulations to me and congratulations to the people of the great state of Ohio. Please let’s get some good mass transit options in Cbus/Ohio in the near future! A train that takes nearly 3 hours to get from Columbus to Cincinnati via Dayton is not one of them! It was a joke. And I, for one, was not laughing.

    I’m curious about a couple of things. 1) Living in Vancouver, what is your interest in Ohio’s mass transit options? 2) Why do you think that we’ll be able to get a better system than 3C with an administration unfriendly to mass transit coming to power?

    #411099

    lifeontwowheels
    Participant

    Paul wrote >>

    Tenzo wrote >>

    kit444 wrote >>

    Paul wrote >>
    Am I the only person on here who is happy to see that Kasich won and relieved that we will not have endure the ridiculous boondoggle of a train that takes almost 3 hours to get from Columbus to Cincinnati?

    Congrats. You won. Now if we ever want to have rail service we’ll have to move to somewhere like Vancouver.

    Or any other large to medium sized city in the US

    If anyone wants to see what a viable mass transit system (light rail to get downtown from the suburbs/airport, dedicated bike lanes, electric bus system, etc.) looks like I would be glad to show them around Vancouver. I will tell you our mass transit system in no way resembles the absurd embarrassment that was the proposed 3C rail.
    So yes, congratulations to me and congratulations to the people of the great state of Ohio. Please let’s get some good mass transit options in Cbus/Ohio in the near future! A train that takes nearly 3 hours to get from Columbus to Cincinnati via Dayton is not one of them! It was a joke. And I, for one, was not laughing.

    It was also a first step…not the last one…to such a system.

    #411100
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    Paul wrote >>
    Please let’s get some good mass transit options in Cbus/Ohio in the near future!

    Not likely to happen. From HERE:

    [Kasich] said he was just against the whole idea of passenger trains — high-speed or conventional — seeing no need in Ohio.

    His position isn’t about conflicting sets of information. He said it was just a “philosophical” difference between him and [Strickland].

    #411101

    Paul
    Participant

    I’m curious about a couple of things. 1) Living in Vancouver, what is your interest in Ohio’s mass transit options? 2) Why do you think that we’ll be able to get a better system than 3C with an administration unfriendly to mass transit coming to power?

    1. I lived in Ohio for 25 years.
    2. Anything is better than the proposed 3C system. I’m also with Kasich that I don’t think there is a real need for a rail system connecting Cincinnati/Columbus/Cleveland right now. My hope is we see some viable mass transit options such as a better bus system (why can’t they do electric buses in Columbus?) and at least start in Columbus with having light rail service from the airport to downtown.

    It was also a first step…not the last one…to such a system.

    No. Just no.

    Not likely to happen.

    See above. You’re thinking is very narrow-minded and not progressive if you believe that a 3C rail is the only mass transit option for Ohio.

    #411102
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    Getting past trains for a moment, anyone else see this?

    http://www.tnr.com/blog/william-galston/78918/its-the-ideology-stupid-midterm-elections

    Note that the source is considered liberal by some and that the author thinks the election results were the way they were because independents are self identifying more as conservative than liberal.

    To complete the argument, there’s one more step: Did independents shift toward Republicans because they had become significantly more conservative between 2006 and 2010? Fortunately we don’t have to speculate about this. According to the Pew Research Center, conservatives as a share of total Independents rose from 29 percent in 2006 to 36 percent in 2010. Gallup finds exactly the same thing: The conservative share rose from 28 percent to 36 percent while moderates declined from 46 percent to 41 percent.

    This shift is part of a broader trend: Over the past two decades, moderates have trended down as share of the total electorate while conservatives have gone up. In 1992, moderates were 43 percent of the total; in 2006, 38 percent; today, only 35 percent. For conservatives, the comparable numbers are 36 percent, 37 percent, and 42 percent, respectively. So the 2010 electorate does not represent a disproportional mobilization of conservatives: If the 2010 electorate had perfectly reflected the voting-age population, it would actually have been a bit more conservative and less moderate than was the population that showed up at the polls. Unless the long-term decline of moderates and rise of conservatives is reversed during the next two years, the ideological balance of the electorate in 2012 could look a lot like it did this year.

    #411103

    kit444
    Participant

    Paul wrote >>

    I’m curious about a couple of things. 1) Living in Vancouver, what is your interest in Ohio’s mass transit options? 2) Why do you think that we’ll be able to get a better system than 3C with an administration unfriendly to mass transit coming to power?

    1. I lived in Ohio for 25 years.
    2. Anything is better than the proposed 3C system. I’m also with Kasich that I don’t think there is a real need for a rail system connecting Cincinnati/Columbus/Cleveland right now. My hope is we see some viable mass transit options such as a better bus system (why can’t they do electric buses in Columbus?) and at least start in Columbus with having light rail service from the airport to downtown.[/quote]

    1. That’s great, but you don’t live here now. The decision doesn’t seem to affect you. You live in a place where you enjoy all these wonderful mass transit options, yet advocate against the only mass transit option that was on the table here. Sure, it’s not up to the standards elsewhere but it was never a choice between 3C and something better. It was a choice between 3C and nothing.

    2. I hope for all those things too, but where’s the funding going to come from? Certainly not the state. And it’s not like the Obama administration is going to say, “Ok, you reject the funding for 3C so let’s throw that money at Columbus for light rail instead.” Sure, there’s not a “real need” for rail connecting the cities, but neither by that base standard is there a need for rail in Vancouver or anywhere else.

    You’re thinking is very narrow-minded and not progressive if you believe that a 3C rail is the only mass transit option for Ohio.

    See Walker’s quote above. Kasich is anything but progressive and in my opinion is quite narrow-minded. It’s his decision now. There are no options.

    #411104

    lifeontwowheels
    Participant

    Paul wrote >>

    I’m curious about a couple of things. 1) Living in Vancouver, what is your interest in Ohio’s mass transit options? 2) Why do you think that we’ll be able to get a better system than 3C with an administration unfriendly to mass transit coming to power?

    1. I lived in Ohio for 25 years.
    2. Anything is better than the proposed 3C system. I’m also with Kasich that I don’t think there is a real need for a rail system connecting Cincinnati/Columbus/Cleveland right now. My hope is we see some viable mass transit options such as a better bus system (why can’t they do electric buses in Columbus?) and at least start in Columbus with having light rail service from the airport to downtown.

    It was also a first step…not the last one…to such a system.

    No. Just no.

    Not likely to happen.

    See above. You’re thinking is very narrow-minded and not progressive if you believe that a 3C rail is the only mass transit option for Ohio.

    I think the key word is “right now”. Can you accurately speak to the need 10, 15 or 20 years down the line? Putting something in place now makes it possible to expand, adapt and improve as the need grows. As it is now, we will have a very difficult time ever meeting that need-if it surfaces-because we are so behind in basic improvements and service.

    #411105
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    Paul wrote >>
    (why can’t they do electric buses in Columbus?)

    Just curious, what do you think electric buses would do differently from regular buses if implemented in Columbus? Obviously, they’d be better for the environment, but without any other sort of changes to routes, ticketing, fares or scheduling I don’t see how they’d be an improved experience for riders or would spur TOD in the way that rail transit does.

    I don’t know if you’ve seen them or ridden them while visiting, but COTA did add a few new hybrid buses to the fleet recently:

    COTA Rolls Out New Hybrid-Electric Buses

    I’ve ridden them a few times. They’re quieter, but that’s about it from an experience standpoint.

    #411106

    Twixlen
    Participant

    rus wrote >>
    Getting past trains for a moment, anyone else see this?
    http://www.tnr.com/blog/william-galston/78918/its-the-ideology-stupid-midterm-elections
    Note that the source is considered liberal by some and that the author thinks the election results were the way they were because independents are self identifying more as conservative than liberal.

    To complete the argument, there’s one more step: Did independents shift toward Republicans because they had become significantly more conservative between 2006 and 2010? Fortunately we don’t have to speculate about this. According to the Pew Research Center, conservatives as a share of total Independents rose from 29 percent in 2006 to 36 percent in 2010. Gallup finds exactly the same thing: The conservative share rose from 28 percent to 36 percent while moderates declined from 46 percent to 41 percent.
    This shift is part of a broader trend: Over the past two decades, moderates have trended down as share of the total electorate while conservatives have gone up. In 1992, moderates were 43 percent of the total; in 2006, 38 percent; today, only 35 percent. For conservatives, the comparable numbers are 36 percent, 37 percent, and 42 percent, respectively. So the 2010 electorate does not represent a disproportional mobilization of conservatives: If the 2010 electorate had perfectly reflected the voting-age population, it would actually have been a bit more conservative and less moderate than was the population that showed up at the polls. Unless the long-term decline of moderates and rise of conservatives is reversed during the next two years, the ideological balance of the electorate in 2012 could look a lot like it did this year.

    Purely, anecdotal on my part… but it seems that since the Reagan years, the push of conservatism has been “value” based – mostly social issues. By pushing social issues, a divide of US to THEM is much more emotionally charged… and, from what I’ve seen of conservatives I know, it seems fear based. Pushing to current times – fear of job loss, fear of “government control,” fear of gays, fear of “other” really feeds the fires of conservatism; things that feel especially personal. Because those on the liberal side of things tend to focus their social issues in a less personal/bigger picture way (example: heathcare reform isn’t about me, it’s about us all), it’s much more difficult to rally around.

    …. I don’t know if I’m making clear what is in my head.

    The other thought for this election is that the under-30’s didn’t turn out. I’d love to see voter turn-out age in state’s where dems lost races (sometimes long-held seats) to a republican. A lot has been said that Obama won because he was able to so rally and energize that particular voting group (under 30’s), and without them, the vote swings naturally more conservatively (as folks tend to become more conservative as they get older).

    #411107

    berdawn
    Member
    #411108
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    Twixlen wrote >>
    Purely, anecdotal on my part… but it seems that since the Reagan years, the push of conservatism has been “value” based – mostly social issues. By pushing social issues, a divide of US to THEM is much more emotionally charged… and, from what I’ve seen of conservatives I know, it seems fear based. Pushing to current times – fear of job loss, fear of “government control,” fear of gays, fear of “other” really feeds the fires of conservatism; things that feel especially personal. Because those on the liberal side of things tend to focus their social issues in a less personal/bigger picture way (example: heathcare reform isn’t about me, it’s about us all), it’s much more difficult to rally around.
    …. I don’t know if I’m making clear what is in my head.

    Well, again purely anecdotal, but I don’t think fear based reasoning is limited to conservatives. Lot of the complaining I hear among liberals is along the lines of “you stupid bastards, you’ve killed us all!”; lack of someone else paying for their medical bills will kill them, corporate bailouts will wreck the country ( hear that from some on the other side as well, come to think of it ), a fascist theocracy is coming, etc. .

    What I found interesting about the article is the recognition from a liberal site that long term trends indicate fewer people are identifying as liberals and more people are identifying as conservative.

    Which, of course, leads to more questions.

    * How do those who self identify as liberal / conservative define liberal / conservative?
    * Presuming the definitions are coherent, why do more people identify as “conservative”?
    * How much does emotion play here? Is it more “I don’t want to be a liberal/conservative, so I’m a liberal/conservative”?

    #411109

    misskitty
    Participant

    Gay Voters’ Support For Republicans Nearly Doubled From 2008
    here
    WASHINGTON — Republicans made significant inroads among gay and lesbian voters in the midterm elections, with national exit polls for the House races showing that the GOP captured 31 percent of the vote of this group this year, compared to 19 percent in 2008.

    I don’t lable myself as democrat or republican. I vote with who’s idea I like more of course it’s only the choice between two evils and that’s just the way it is.
    I prefer a small government I think they are too involved sometimes and they need not be in some situations.
    Honestly I think you should be able to opt out of paying SSI taxes if you never plan to use it or want it I am not a fan of supporting others when I need to support my family first.
    I know people say that Kasich is a bad man with bad intentions. Tell me someone in Government that is not out for their best intentions and personal power trip?
    Kasich might be bad but he’s knows business and he knows money so maybe he can help Ohio in the business aspect because we need it.

    #411110

    Paul
    Participant

    kit444 wrote >>
    1. That’s great, but you don’t live here now. The decision doesn’t seem to affect you. You live in a place where you enjoy all these wonderful mass transit options, yet advocate against the only mass transit option that was on the table here. Sure, it’s not up to the standards elsewhere but it was never a choice between 3C and something better. It was a choice between 3C and nothing.
    2. I hope for all those things too, but where’s the funding going to come from? Certainly not the state. And it’s not like the Obama administration is going to say, “Ok, you reject the funding for 3C so let’s throw that money at Columbus for light rail instead.” Sure, there’s not a “real need” for rail connecting the cities, but neither by that base standard is there a need for rail in Vancouver or anywhere else.
    See Walker’s quote above. Kasich is anything but progressive and in my opinion is quite narrow-minded. It’s his decision now. There are no options.

    1. What is your point? First of all, it does matter to me since I grew up in Ohio, still have family, friends, and property there, visit frequently, and care about the development of both Columbus and Ohio.

    I live in a place that has awesome mass transit options that I WOULD LOVE TO SEE FOR COLUMBUS. However, if we had something similar to the 3C rail proposed here I would still oppose it because it’s a slow outdated expensive train that doesn’t serve a need not already filled by other forms of transit.

    Opposing a bad idea is not the same as opposing progress or mass transit in general. Is that so hard for you (and others on this forum) to understand? It really seems to be.

    The choice was not between 3C and nothing. It is between looking to the past and looking to the future. I’m looking to the future, and it’s not a 3-hour train ride to Cincinnati. It’s just not.

    2. I have no idea how it actually works. Whether accepting money for the 3C would help or hurt Ohio’s chances of getting money for better transit options in the future. I don’t think anyone can say for certain how it works. I wish we could have used that $400 million for better transit options and I blame whoever was associated with the grant for shitting the bed bigtime on how the funds were earmarked.

    I disagree with your assessment of where transit needs exist and to what degree. I’m not even sure that you understood what I was trying to say.

    lifeontwowheels wrote >>
    I think the key word is “right now”. Can you accurately speak to the need 10, 15 or 20 years down the line? Putting something in place now makes it possible to expand, adapt and improve as the need grows. As it is now, we will have a very difficult time ever meeting that need-if it surfaces-because we are so behind in basic improvements and service.

    I’m not Nostradamus, so no. However, I don’t think there will be a need in 20 years for a train that takes 3 hours to get from Columbus to Cincinnati. I don’t think there will ever be one. I think something should be built that addresses either current needs or future ones. Not needs that haven’t existed since the early 1900’s.

    Walker wrote >>
    Just curious, what do you think electric buses would do differently from regular buses if implemented in Columbus? Obviously, they’d be better for the environment, but without any other sort of changes to routes, ticketing, fares or scheduling I don’t see how they’d be an improved experience for riders or would spur TOD in the way that rail transit does.
    I don’t know if you’ve seen them or ridden them while visiting, but COTA did add a few new hybrid buses to the fleet recently:
    https://www.columbusunderground.com/cota-rolls-out-new-hybrid-electric-buses
    I’ve ridden them a few times. They’re quieter, but that’s about it from an experience standpoint.

    I like the zero-tailpipe-emissions aspect of them, and I think it encourages more people to ride the bus when it’s not a loud, stinky, smoking behemoth. It just makes sense for urban environments.

    I certainly agree with you that improvements need to be made to routes, scheduling, reliability, etc. That is definitely the crux of any good bus system.

    I have not seen those hybrid buses. Pretty neat. The ones I’m thinking of are totally electric. They also throw off cool sparks sometimes when transitioning power lines.

    For a little more info on the Vancouver trolley buses see the second part of this article:
    http://cityoflakesurbanism.blogspot.com/2010/03/ideas-from-vancouver-transit.html

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 200 total)

The forum ‘Politics’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe below: